Editing Socialism (section)

== Etymology ==
According to Andrew Vincent, "[t]he word 'socialism' finds its root in the Latin {{lang|la|sociare}}, which means to combine or to share. The related, more technical term in Roman and then medieval law was {{lang|la|societas}}. This latter word could mean companionship and fellowship as well as the more legalistic idea of a consensual contract between freemen".<ref>{{cite book |first=Andrew |last=Vincent |date=2010 |title=Modern Political Ideologies |publisher=[[Wiley-Blackwell]] |isbn=978-1405154956 |page=83}}</ref>

[[File:Ehrerbietige Vorstellung und Einladung an meine lieben Mitmenschen.pdf|thumb|19th century [[utopian socialist]] pamphlet by [[Rudolf Sutermeister]]]]
Initial use of ''socialism'' was claimed by [[Pierre Leroux]], who alleged he first used the term in the Parisian journal {{lang|fr|[[Le Globe]]}} in 1832.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.etymonline.com/word/socialism |title=socialism (n.) |publisher=[[Online Etymology Dictionary]] |website=etymonline |access-date=3 May 2021}}</ref><ref name="Kołakowski2005">{{cite book |first=Leszek |last=Kołakowski |author-link=Leszek Kołakowski |title=Main Currents of Marxism: The Founders, the Golden Age, the Breakdown |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qUCxpznbkaoC |year=2005 |publisher=[[W.W. Norton & Company]] |isbn=978-0393-060546 |page=151 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref> Leroux was a follower of [[Henri de Saint-Simon]], one of the founders of what would later be labelled [[utopian socialism]]. Socialism contrasted with the liberal doctrine of [[Liberal individualism|individualism]] that emphasized the moral worth of the individual while stressing that people act or should act as if they are in isolation from one another. The original utopian socialists condemned this doctrine of individualism for failing to address social concerns during the [[Industrial Revolution]], including poverty, oppression, and vast [[wealth inequality]]. They viewed their society as harming community life by basing society on competition. They presented socialism as an alternative to liberal individualism based on the shared ownership of resources.<ref name="Marvin Perry 1600, p. 540">{{cite book |first1=Marvin |last1=Perry |first2=Myrna |last2=Chase |first3=Margaret |last3=Jacob |first4=James R. |last4=Jacob |title=Western Civilization: Ideas, Politics, and Society – From 1600 |volume=2 |edition=Ninth |location=Boston |publisher=[[Houghton Mifflin Harcourt]] Publishing Company |date=2009 |page=540 |isbn=978-1305445499 |oclc=1289795802}}</ref> Saint-Simon proposed [[economic planning]], scientific administration and the application of scientific understanding to the organisation of society. By contrast, [[Robert Owen]] proposed to organise production and ownership via [[cooperative]]s.<ref name="Marvin Perry 1600, p. 540"/><ref>{{cite book |last1=Gregory |first1=Paul |last2=Stuart |first2=Robert |title=The Global Economy and its Economic Systems |publisher=[[South-Western College Publishing]] |date=2013 |isbn=978-1285-05535-0 |page=159 |quote=Socialist writers of the nineteenth century proposed socialist arrangements for sharing as a response to the inequality and poverty of the industrial revolution. English socialist Robert Owen proposed that ownership and production take place in cooperatives, where all members shared equally. French socialist Henri Saint-Simon proposed to the contrary: socialism meant solving economic problems by means of state administration and planning, and taking advantage of new advances in science.}}</ref> ''Socialism'' is also attributed in France to [[Marie Roch Louis Reybaud]] while in Britain it is attributed to Owen, who became one of the fathers of the [[cooperative movement]].<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |dictionary=[[Oxford English Dictionary]] |chapter=Etymology of socialism}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Russell |first=Bertrand |author-link=Bertrand Russell |date=1972 |title=A History of Western Philosophy |publisher=Touchstone |pages=781}}</ref>

The definition and usage of ''socialism'' settled by the 1860s, with the term ''socialist'' replacing ''[[associationist]]'', ''[[co-operative]]'', ''[[Mutualism (economic theory)|mutualist]]'' and ''[[collectivist]]'', which had been used as synonyms, while the term ''communism'' fell out of use during this period.<ref name="Williams 1983 288">{{cite book |last=Williams |first=Raymond |title=Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society, revised edition |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |year=1983 |isbn=978-0195204698 |page=[https://archive.org/details/keywordsvocabula00willrich/page/288 288] |chapter=Socialism |quote=Modern usage began to settle from the 1860s, and in spite of the earlier variations and distinctions it was socialist and socialism which came through as the predominant words ... Communist, in spite of the distinction that had been made in the 1840s, was very much less used, and parties in the Marxist tradition took some variant of social and socialist as titles. |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/keywordsvocabula00willrich/page/288}}</ref> An early distinction between ''[[communism]]'' and ''socialism'' was that the latter aimed to only socialise production while the former aimed to socialise both [[Production (economics)|production]] and [[Consumption (economics)|consumption]] (in the form of free access to final goods).<ref name="Steele 1992 43">{{cite book |last=Steele |first=David |title=From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation |publisher=Open Court Publishing Company |year=1992 |isbn=978-0875484495 |page=43 |quote=One widespread distinction was that socialism socialised production only while communism socialised production and consumption.}}</ref> By 1888, [[Marxists]] employed ''socialism'' in place of ''communism'' as the latter had come to be considered an old-fashioned synonym for ''socialism''. It was not until after the [[Bolshevik Revolution]] that ''socialism'' was appropriated by [[Vladimir Lenin]] to mean a stage between [[capitalism]] and communism. He used it to defend the Bolshevik program from Marxist criticism that Russia's [[productive forces]] were not sufficiently developed for communism.<ref name="Steele 1992 44-45">{{cite book |last=Steele |first=David |title=From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation |publisher=Open Court Publishing Company |year=1992 |isbn=978-0875484495 |pages=44–45 |quote=By 1888, the term 'socialism' was in general use among Marxists, who had dropped 'communism', now considered an old fashioned term meaning the same as 'socialism'. ... At the turn of the century, Marxists called themselves socialists. ... The definition of socialism and communism as successive stages was introduced into Marxist theory by Lenin in 1917. ... the new distinction was helpful to Lenin in defending his party against the traditional Marxist criticism that Russia was too backward for a socialist revolution.}}</ref> The distinction between ''communism'' and ''socialism'' became salient in 1918 after the [[Russian Social Democratic Labour Party]] renamed itself to the [[All-Russian Communist Party]], interpreting ''communism'' specifically to mean socialists who supported the politics and theories of [[Bolshevism]], [[Leninism]] and later that of [[Marxism–Leninism]],<ref>{{harvp|Busky|2000|p=9}}: "In a modern sense of the word, communism refers to the ideology of Marxism–Leninism."</ref> although [[communist parties]] continued to describe themselves as socialists dedicated to socialism.<ref>{{cite book |last=Williams |first=Raymond |title=Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society |edition=revised |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |year=1983 |isbn=978-0195204698 |page=[https://archive.org/details/keywordsvocabula00willrich/page/289 289] |chapter=Socialism |quote=The decisive distinction between socialist and communist, as in one sense these terms are now ordinarily used, came with the renaming, in 1918, of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks) as the All-Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks). From that time on, a distinction of socialist from communist, often with supporting definitions such as social democrat or democratic socialist, became widely current, although it is significant that all communist parties, in line with earlier usage, continued to describe themselves as socialist and dedicated to socialism. |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/keywordsvocabula00willrich/page/289}}</ref> According to ''The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx'', "Marx used many terms to refer to a [[post-capitalist society]]—positive [[humanism]], socialism, communism, realm of free individuality, [[free association of producers]], etc. He used these terms completely interchangeably. The notion that 'socialism' and 'communism' are distinct historical stages is alien to his work and only entered the lexicon of Marxism after his death".<ref name=Hudis>{{cite book |editor1-last=Hudis |editor1-first=Peter |editor2-last=Vidal |editor2-first=Matt |editor3-last=Smith |editor3-first=Tony |editor4-last=Rotta |editor4-first=Tomás |editor5-last=Prew |editor5-first=Paul |date=September 2018 – June 2019 |url=https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190695545.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780190695545 |title=The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx |chapter-url=https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190695545.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780190695545-e-50 |chapter=Marx's Concept of Socialism |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |isbn=978-019-0695545 |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190695545.001.0001}}</ref>

In [[Christian Europe]], communists were believed to have adopted [[atheism]]. In Protestant England, ''communism'' was too close to the [[Roman Catholic]] [[communion rite]], hence ''socialist'' was the preferred term.<ref>{{cite book |last=Williams |first=Raymond |author-link=Raymond Williams |title=Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society |publisher=[[Fontana Books]] |year=1976 |isbn=978-0-006334798 |title-link=Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society}}</ref> Engels wrote that in 1848, when ''[[The Communist Manifesto]]'' was published, socialism was respectable in Europe while communism was not. The [[Owenites]] in England and the [[Fourierists]] in France were considered respectable socialists while working-class movements that "proclaimed the necessity of total social change" denoted themselves ''communists''.<ref>{{cite book |last=Engels |first=Friedrich |author-link=Friedrich Engels |title=Preface to the 1888 English Edition of the Communist Manifesto |orig-date=1888 |pages=202 |publisher=[[Penguin Books]] |date=2002}}</ref> This branch of socialism produced the communist work of [[Étienne Cabet]] in France and [[Wilhelm Weitling]] in Germany.<ref>{{cite book |last=Todorova |first=Maria |year=2020 |title=The Lost World of Socialists at Europe's Margins: Imagining Utopia, 1870s–1920s |edition=hardcover |location=London |publisher=[[Bloomsbury Academic]] |isbn=978-1350150331}}</ref> British moral philosopher [[John Stuart Mill]] discussed a form of economic socialism within free market. In later editions of his ''[[Principles of Political Economy]]'' (1848), Mill posited that "as far as economic theory was concerned, there is nothing in principle in economic theory that precludes an economic order based on socialist policies"<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |last=Wilson |first=Fred |chapter-url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill/ |chapter=John Stuart Mill |encyclopedia=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] |year=2007 |access-date=2 August 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |quote=Mill, in contrast, advances a form of liberal democratic socialism for the enlargement of freedom as well as to realise social and distributive justice. He offers a powerful account of economic injustice and justice that is centered on his understanding of freedom and its conditions. |first=Bruce |last=Baum |chapter=J. S. Mill and Liberal Socialism |editor1-first=Nadia |editor1-last=Urbanati |editor2-first=Alex |editor2-last=Zacharas |title=J.S. Mill's Political Thought: A Bicentennial Reassessment |location=Cambridge |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |date=2007}}</ref> and promoted substituting capitalist businesses with [[worker cooperative]]s.<ref>''Principles of Political Economy with Some of Their Applications to Social Philosophy'', IV.7.21. ''John Stuart Mill: Political Economy'', IV.7.21. "The form of association, however, which if mankind continue to improve, must be expected in the end to predominate, is not that which can exist between a capitalist as chief, and work-people without a voice in the management, but the association of the labourers themselves on terms of equality, collectively owning the capital with which they carry on their operations, and working under managers elected and removable by themselves."</ref> While democrats looked to the [[Revolutions of 1848]] as a [[democratic revolution]] which in the long run ensured [[liberty, equality, and fraternity]], Marxists denounced it as a betrayal of working-class ideals by a [[bourgeoisie]] indifferent to the [[proletariat]].<ref>{{cite book |first=Robert |last=Gildea |chapter=1848 in European Collective Memory |editor1-last=Evans |editor2-last=Strandmann |title=The Revolutions in Europe, 1848–1849 |pages=207–235}}</ref>